Can someone explain to me, how someone can dismiss all morality and still not be considered a truly evil character? If you're not held back by morality, then that is a pretty bad thing to me.

Morality is completely subjective, tho. In fact, morality is an abstraction. It doesn't really exist.

And I don't even know if I'd characterize Wrathion as without a morality. Maybe not a morality we share, sure. But, at least on the surface, Wrathion does have a morality ... he believes life on Azeroth should be allowed to continue, and that anything that threatens it is "bad" and anything that promotes it is "good". To him this means that there must be sacrifices for the greater good, otherwise there will be a greater cost to pay.

Now ... I think the long run he will wind up a villain. Maybe in WoW, maybe in Warcraft 4 ... but he's going to ask us to make sacrifices we're not willing to make. Likely he's going to decide the world's best interests are in following his commands. It's pretty clear that moreso than him helping us, we're helping him.

But, sorta like with Garrosh ... I think we'll find Wrathion a villain that's not corrupted by forces outside his control, but rather we're in opposition simply over philosophical/moral/existential disagreement. He very well may summon the Legion ... which we might not find out about until after we beat them back. Maybe his goal is to bring about this conflict at the best time for it to happen in Azeroth's favor, maybe he's doing it to establish himself as the planet's ruler (and even then, maybe he truly believes it's our best interest for him to rule us). I think maybe even we'll find that most/all major forces in the game fall into this gray area ... old gods, burning legion, titans ...

"good" = Doing what you can for the people within reason, and simply to do it for the sake of good.

Neutral = Doing what ever it takes to keep people who are within your best interest alive, but without putting your own head on the line.

Evil = Doing what ever it takes to achive your own goals and or better suits you in general, no matter who pays the price and consequences.

by that definition wrathion is evil

---------- Post added 2013-05-02 at 06:02 AM ----------

Originally Posted by Count Zero

Morality is completely subjective, tho. In fact, morality is an abstraction. It doesn't really exist.

And I don't even know if I'd characterize Wrathion as without a morality. Maybe not a morality we share, sure. But, at least on the surface, Wrathion does have a morality ... he believes life on Azeroth should be allowed to continue, and that anything that threatens it is "bad" and anything that promotes it is "good". To him this means that there must be sacrifices for the greater good, otherwise there will be a greater cost to pay.

Now ... I think the long run he will wind up a villain. Maybe in WoW, maybe in Warcraft 4 ... but he's going to ask us to make sacrifices we're not willing to make. Likely he's going to decide the world's best interests are in following his commands. It's pretty clear that moreso than him helping us, we're helping him.

But, sorta like with Garrosh ... I think we'll find Wrathion a villain that's not corrupted by forces outside his control, but rather we're in opposition simply over philosophical/moral/existential disagreement. He very well may summon the Legion ... which we might not find out about until after we beat them back. Maybe his goal is to bring about this conflict at the best time for it to happen in Azeroth's favor, maybe he's doing it to establish himself as the planet's ruler (and even then, maybe he truly believes it's our best interest for him to rule us). I think maybe even we'll find that most/all major forces in the game fall into this gray area ... old gods, burning legion, titans ...

You can always say morality is objective, as long as there are killers who don't think they're doing anything wrong. Even someone who murders someone for the pure fun of it can claim that he doesn't believe murdering someone for the pure fun of it is morally wrong. But at that point, what is the sense in arguing morality?

There are different kinds of moralities. Some people think sex before marriage is wrong. Those are the kind of things where I would say this is not objectively wrong.

But killing and stealing, for your own personal gain, is usually considered morally wrong, unless you have justification - stealing bread because you're hungry, killing out of self-defense.

Can someone explain to me, how someone can dismiss all morality and still not be considered a truly evil character? If you're not held back by morality, then that is a pretty bad thing to me.

Because Morality is subjective. By the way, Wrathion isn't immoral, I don't think anybody has realistically tried to argue that he is. His morals just don't line up with what the Horde or Alliance might consider the same as theirs.

by that definition wrathion is evil

By the established, and I would say limited, definition of the person you're quoting, that would mean Wrathion is neutral.

But that isn't what Wrathion is doing. He's doing what he thinks is willing to stop the Legion when/if it returns. Now, if you want to entertain my theory in the midst of this, then the argument changes, but that is speculation, not lore that has already happened. At this point in the story, Wrathion is willing to engage in powers that some of the more goodey-two-shoes (Like Anduin) think is a bad idea. But does that make him immoral? No. It just means his definition of morality is different than Anduin's.

If it takes lying to both factions and powering up champions to stop the War, then so be it. The Horde vs Alliance War is nothing but a drain on Azeroth's strength to Wrathion. Something that, if allowed to continue for long enough, will weaken the planet so much that when the Legion DOES return, Azeroth won't be strong enough to stop it. Thus, for somebody who really doesn't care about the War, ending it as soon as possible is the moral thing to do. That is all Wrathion is doing.

Whether or not he lies to each side, whether or not he tells each side he supports them, and whether or not he has a direct hand in stopping Garrosh or just manipulates people from behind the scenes to do so (Which seems far more likely given his past actions). All Wrathion is doing is stopping something that he doesn't even believe in one way or another. The very fact that he only says, "The War should end quickly" without ever saying, "Garrosh is wrong" or "The Alliance is wrong" or "The Rebellion is wrong" shows that he doesn't care about it. He's helping the Alliance and Rebellion stop Garrosh because that is simply what the tide of the War has swung to. Wrathion himself really didn't have much of a hand, if any, in how the War has currently turned out. He's merely working with what has happened already.

You can always say morality is objective

You really can't. You try to argue that people will see morality as objective, but the your argument proves that morality itself is, in fact, subjective. Morality by its very definition changes from person to person.

You really can't. You try to argue that people will see morality as objective, but the your argument proves that morality itself is, in fact, subjective. Morality by its very definition changes from person to person.

I, personally, find the argument of morality in a franchise like WarCraft to be futile. The franchise does not carry the same laws and morals that we do living on this little ball called Earth.

Remember the Defias Brotherhood? They were thieves. If they lived on Earth we would attempt as much as possible to capture them to face justice, and things like the death penalty wouldn't even be on the table. On Azeroth? The local law hires adventurers/mercs to clear them out with swords in the gut. We basically assassinated the entire faction, and the only person we ever saw them actually kill was Tiffen, which could be called an accident since it was someone in a crowd throwing a rock at Varian. All the farmers in Westfall were just being scared out of the area, so we never saw any of them get murdered (at least, not until the new Defias Brotherhood in Cataclysm, but that can be considered a different group), and yet we go to great lengths to kill all of them. The few Stormwind did capture? We kill them when the riot in the Stockades.

I mean think about it. Our characters will kill ANYONE as long as someone is paying them or get something from them. What is moral about that?

I don't think Wrathion is playing both sides. Canonically, I think he's working with a single champion, who is helping him accomplish his goals in exchange for powerful rewards. I don't think storyline wise he's arming multiple champions of both factions, just as I don't think storyline wise there are multiple mortals running around with Dragonwrath or Fangs of the Father.

At least for Fangs of the Father that makes sense, but I don't see why it couldn't be true of the MoP quest chain.

Especially since Wrathion pretty obviously states he's trying to end the war asap.

Remember the Defias Brotherhood? They were thieves. If they lived on Earth we would attempt as much as possible to capture them to face justice, and things like the death penalty wouldn't even be on the table. On Azeroth? The local law hires adventurers/mercs to clear them out with swords in the gut. We basically assassinated the entire faction, and the only person we ever saw them actually kill was Tiffen, which could be called an accident since it was someone in a crowd throwing a rock at Varian. All the farmers in Westfall were just being scared out of the area, so we never saw any of them get murdered (at least, not until the new Defias Brotherhood in Cataclysm, but that can be considered a different group), and yet we go to great lengths to kill all of them. The few Stormwind did capture? We kill them when the riot in the Stockades.

I mean think about it. Our characters will kill ANYONE as long as someone is paying them or get something from them. What is moral about that?

Well I think unfortunately the point about our characters is just the nature of an MMO. As for the Defias and the Stonemasons? I'm totally there with you. But I think the issue is a bit more muddled because Onyxia was behind scenes manipulating everything for the first incarnation of the Defias. Still, though, I think the Defias issue is a good example of the moral questionability of the Alliance that we've moved away from as a whole as the Alliance. There are tidbits here and there (Like Rogers commanding us to gun down drowning Horde members -- although I hardly think that was proving Blizzard's argument in that Q&A about the Alliance doing questionable things), but generally we've just been steadily moving toward the "good" column.

So how many adventuerers out there were able to personally help Wrathion forge the lightning lance thing? How many adventurers personally brought him the heart of the thunder king? How many personally are going to help him pass a trial of the celestials in 5.3? In 5.0/5.1, sure it could work. But 5.2 the story falls apart if you assume everyone's doing it.

Yeah, you have a point, 5.2 kind of throws a monkey wrench into the plans. Alrighty! You have convinced me.

But, taking out my point about him playing both sides, he still says he wants to end the War asap and never really expresses an interest in one side truly winning over another. Sounds more like he's still paying lipservice. I suppose my initial point in this regard is that Wrathion just doesn't seem to really care about the War, it just needs to end or we're screwed when the Legion returns.

I wouldn't be shocked if the 5.4 quest has you gathering things from the Siege raid, forming your weapon, and then being sent to slay Garrosh or the Sha of Pride or whoever the last boss is. Though i hope it's more involved than that after the neat things set up in 5.2.

And anyway, Wrathion's intentions have always been quite clear in Blizzard's words. He DOES have Azeroth's best interests in mind.
He's merely so worked up on that mission that (as a true black dragon) he doesn't really care if someone gets hurt in the process. If he deems necessary to have Azeroth stand united against the coming Legion (which in the Celestials questline he claims to "have seen"), you can bet he's gonna do all that it takes to ensure the war ends quickly. If that means thousands of people must be slaughtered, then so be it.
His discussion with the Tiger shows his current reasoning to be honest: the best way to help your allies is to crush their foes. Maybe he'll evolve from that, maybe not, we can't tell for sure. Still, it is interesting to see, at least for me. For once, we don't have an awfully goodie goodie character as our "help" this time, that alone is worth the story.

Where would the Next Expansion end up?
Because if what you said is true about Wrathion bringing BL to Azeroth, it means the whole thing would revolve agrond saving Azeroth.
We've had this during the Cataclysm and it be a very BAD﻿ choice.

Where would the Next Expansion end up?
Because if what you said is true about Wrathion bringing BL to Azeroth, it means the whole thing would revolve agrond saving Azeroth.
We've had this during the Cataclysm and it be a very BAD﻿ choice.

Not necessarily. 5.3 introduces technology to phase zones for max level characters. They could easily do this for, say, Orgrimmar, Stormwind, and some other key zones, while still having the vast majority of the expansion on Argus or wherever we're going next. Sort of a "If we go stop their home base, we stop their invasion." Like a base race, only with...worlds lol.

Refering to the "We must rebuild the final Titan!" soundbit? If so, I seriously doubt that has anything to do with the actual death of the Titans or their destruction. In Wotlk the Titans send Algalon personally to finish off the planet, so I doubt they are dead and gone.

Actually, no, they didnt personally do anything to our knowledge. He was programmed to re-originate the planet. No one told him "hey get on the ship, go over there and wipe em out".